Jump to content

shull

Big Boris, Our Prime Minister

Recommended Posts


And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?
I'm not sure if you are being bloody minded or you are just being thick as shit.
English parliament fur f**ksake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:


 

 


Yeah, well, thanks for explaining what everyone already knows. :hammer

The actual point of the question, though, was if (and I don't know if this is correct or not) the two appeals are heard under different legal systems then there is the possibility (however small) that it could end with conflicting results. What would the outcome then be? Maybe they aren't held under different legal systems and/or maybe they are being heard together (is it one decision, or two?) and it is a moot point.

If it turns out that both decisions are upheld (or both overturned) there will obviously be a conflict and a decision will have to be made one way or other. After that decision, there would be people that will claim that English law is being treated as more important than Scots law or Scots law is being treated as more important than English law.

Or is there a separate sort of "UK Law" that these are heard under?

We all know WHAT the Supreme Court does, very few of us will know the details of HOW it does it. I suppose we are all about to find out.

Where the feck's ZA when you need him?

 

Both Scots and English law are competent to hear these cases. Above both of the courts mentioned there is the Supreme Court in the UK to which this the judgement in Scotland, England and NI have been referred as e.g. The court in Scotland recognised the case was likely to end up there, said so in their judgement and in doing so expedited matters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:


 

9 hours ago, jaybee said:
And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?

 


It's not an English Parliament that it pertains to, though, is it?

 

No, but it is in London last time I looked........perhaps they moved it and didn't tell me .... ever so sorry. Actually yes it is, or i you would rather be pedantic it's a UK parliament sitting in London, but then that belittles the wee nyafs one in Edinburgh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, salmonbuddie said:
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
dae you ware tartin nickers?

Just so we're clear, I didn't write that. Not sure how you ended up with that, it was a response to a post I'd made.

Yes it was apologies it was not aimed at you...............grovel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TPAFKATS said:
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
it's entirely political supporting the wee nyaf in charge and the judge who spoke looks like Salmonds Daddy.
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
as are  the wee fat jock judges

Oh wait, it's humour...

Well those wee fat lawers/judges/magistrates were certainly a joke, but what is more 'humerous' is the fact that people seriously believe that there judgement is NOT Political, THAT is a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Slartibartfast said:
9 hours ago, jaybee said:
And just to be bloody minded...........how relevant is Scots law when it pertains to an English Parliament..........and just to be absurd (I can be good at that) if the Scottish legal system decided all schools should have Scots pies for lunch........how is that relevant to English schools in other words what the feck business is it of ours?

So it was just English MPs that the parliament was prorogued for?

You're not very good at this trolling lark, are you?

Whilst YOU are just not very good or perhaps just NOT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone in here that has studied law or work in that field able to clear up a question I have?

There's a quote being flung around twitter "Scots Law has no equal in English Law, in the Act of Union 1707, Scottish Law is sovereign in Scotland and has no equal outside Scotland. In other words, Scotland has its own law and no English or British court can overrule Scots Law"

I don't know enough about it to call bullshit - but are there serious legal implications if the decisions do turn out to clash?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Doakes said:

Anyone in here that has studied law or work in that field able to clear up a question I have?

There's a quote being flung around twitter "Scots Law has no equal in English Law, in the Act of Union 1707, Scottish Law is sovereign in Scotland and has no equal outside Scotland. In other words, Scotland has its own law and no English or British court can overrule Scots Law"

I don't know enough about it to call bullshit - but are there serious legal implications if the decisions do turn out to clash?

On Tuesday two Scots will be sitting on the panel of judge's as the decision taken is for the whole of the UK. There will also be Welsh and N. Ireland on the panel also from what I heard on Newsnight. 

Edited by Isle Of Bute Saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

What I am saying is that all of the UK supreme court judges will be highly aware and competent in their scrutiny of a judgement made under Scots law.  It happens in so many walks of life already and no-one is crying about other appeals that have gone from Edinburgh to London.

Those bringing the case say it is not about Brexit, it is about the abuse of power and what is really highlighted is the absence of a reliable user manual for the governance of the UK.

There will be no grounds for outrage and i say that as an independence-leaning Scot.  If people choose to use a decision that is made in the UK supreme court as evidence that Scotland's voice is never heard then I am afraid that will be a set-back for independence.  There is a strong enough positive case for independence and there is no need to resort to faux-outrage as a way of forwarding the cause.

 

Well indeed, these are the rules we have to play by.

Makes a pretty strong case for changing the game though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Doakes said:

Anyone in here that has studied law or work in that field able to clear up a question I have?

There's a quote being flung around twitter "Scots Law has no equal in English Law, in the Act of Union 1707, Scottish Law is sovereign in Scotland and has no equal outside Scotland. In other words, Scotland has its own law and no English or British court can overrule Scots Law"

I don't know enough about it to call bullshit - but are there serious legal implications if the decisions do turn out to clash?

It's only true up to the point where Scots law diverges from the rest of the UK.  Decisions in the UK supreme court  are mostly considered influential over what might eventually come before a scottish court in the same context.  In other words, the decision of the supreme court will influence the thinking of Scots judges if a further constitutional question comes forward.  The Scots judge might choose to act against the influence but is bound to consider the possibility of an appeal to the UK supreme court and the Scots judge already has their opinion so going against that influence would be pointless.  In some cases, I believe, the UK supreme court has authority over Scots judgements..

In Scotland, legislation handed down from Westminster is applied in it's original form-health and safety law and regulation is a good example of that-  however the structure in NI dictates that they have their own version of some, if not all, UK laws. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She obviously felt that she had to clear the air on this one.
When challenged by temporary speaker Christopher Omulele (Luanda) on how she intends to have farting and flatulence aboard air crafts checked and if possible stopped, she said special training of aircraft crew should be undertaken.

Ffs, with that level of planning she'd fit in well with Boris and his plans for how we will sort brexit. Obviously with her being a black African our PM may cause (another) diplomatic incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then you must surely understand the problem with saying things like "We’ve seen what’s happened in Zimbabwe, South Africa and in Trinidad. I don’t mean to sound crass or offend but when the likes of Britain gave independence it’s like the lunatics taking over the asylum. I know many Trini’s that wish the British were still in charge."


Maybe I could have used a different description (Lunatics taking over the Asylum) but as I said, it wasn’t meant to offend.
However, this is a very interesting interview which is basically what I said over a couple of posts. For what it’s worth. I watched another documentary where 63% of Jamaicans would prefer to have Britain back in charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Russian Saint said:

 


Maybe I could have used a different description (Lunatics taking over the Asylum) but as I said, it wasn’t meant to offend.
However, this is a very interesting interview which is basically what I said over a couple of posts. For what it’s worth. I watched another documentary where 63% of Jamaicans would prefer to have Britain back in charge.

 

 

 

 

OK let me re-phrase.

After all the damage we have historically caused in these countries, privilieged white people would be better off keeping their mouths shut about the state these countries are in. We shouldn't be moralising on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK let me re-phrase.
After all the damage we have historically caused in these countries, privilieged white people would be better off keeping their mouths shut about the state these countries are in. We shouldn't be moralising on the subject.


It’s not a case of “moralising” and it has nothing to do with “White privilege”, I merely put across my findings from being in some of these countries......... first hand experience I think it’s called. That video only highlighted my point.
As I stated previously, we can’t turn the clock back 200 years or more and right the wrongs that our ancestors did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When challenged by temporary speaker Christopher Omulele (Luanda) on how she intends to have farting and flatulence aboard air crafts checked and if possible stopped, she said special training of aircraft crew should be undertaken.

Ffs, with that level of planning she'd fit in well with Boris and his plans for how we will sort brexit. Obviously with her being a black African our PM may cause (another) diplomatic incident.


Nice wee racist comment to finish the post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...